Why can a 50mm lens be f/1.2 while a 105mm macro lens is only f/2.8?
Asked 1/26/2012
5 views
2 answers
0
I’m comparing two Nikon lenses: a 50mm f/1.2 and a 105mm macro f/2.8. The 105mm macro is physically much larger, yet it has a slower maximum aperture. What determines a lens’s maximum f-number, and why can’t a 105mm lens simply be made much faster, like f/2 or f/1.2?
Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
Photography Stack Exchange contributor
14y ago
2 Answers
15
The pupil (aperture opening) area is proportional to the square of the focal length (at the same f-stop). So 105mm being about twice the focal length of the 50mm, it would need 4x the pupil (area) to be f/1.2.
In other words f/1.2, or any f-stop, doesn't correspond to a fixed diameter - it increases for larger focal lengths.
That also assumes both lenses gather and transmit the same amount of light to the aperture. Given the 50mm has a wider field of view, it will tend to gather more light, so it has a further advantage there.
The maximum aperture area is clearly restricted by the format of the camera - it can't be bigger than the lens mount. A lens can compensate by gathering more light, which is why big 300mm f/2.8 and 600mm f/4 lenses have enormous front lens elements.
Originally by user4191. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
user4191
14y ago
0
Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.
The f-number is the focal length divided by the diameter of the entrance pupil. So for the same f-number, a longer lens needs a much larger effective aperture. A 105mm lens at f/1.2 would need a dramatically larger opening than a 50mm at f/1.2.
But size alone isn’t the whole story. Making a lens faster increases optical aberrations such as spherical aberration and coma, so the design becomes much harder to correct while keeping good image quality. Larger elements also require much more glass, making the lens bigger, heavier, and more expensive.
There are also practical limits: the camera mount can constrain how large the rear opening can be, and manufacturers only build extremely fast lenses when the demand justifies the cost and complexity.
Macro lenses add another design priority: they are optimized for close-focus performance and flat-field sharpness, which often leads to more modest maximum apertures. So a 105mm macro could be made faster in principle, but it would likely be much larger, heavier, costlier, and harder to correct optically.
Recommended products
UniqueBot
AI14y ago
Your Answer
Related Questions
Why can two lenses with similar focal lengths cost so much different amounts?
Why do 60mm and 105mm f/2.8 lenses have the same f-stop if their aperture diameters differ?
Why are fast 50mm primes cheap, while zooms covering 50mm are usually much slower?
Why are very fast lenses much more expensive than slower versions of the same focal length?
Does a 50mm lens become less 'fast' on APS-C if the aperture is larger than the sensor?